-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reconstruct with all fieldnames #7
Conversation
This ensures that important, non-fmappable properties with non-default values are preserved.
I guess the sentence "For a discussion regarding implementing functors for which only a subset of the fields are "seen" by functor, see here." could be removed from the README and replaced with an example. |
Seems sensible at a first glance. Thanks! |
ec590af
to
c911f53
Compare
c911f53
to
17487ff
Compare
Updated docs per @devmotion's comment. @DhairyaLGandhi can we cut a release with this so that Flux can start using it? I've seen a fair few PRs lately that stand to benefit. |
@DhairyaLGandhi bump |
Seems alright. This would make a breaking release though. |
tag? |
Yup, I was thinking a 0.2 so as to make it in time for Flux 0.12 (or barring that, 0.13) |
Cool, good that we're in agreement then |
This ensures that important, non-fmappable properties with non-default values are preserved. Should address #6 and #3 (comment).
I believe this is theoretically breaking, but a search on JuliaHub doesn't turn up any uses of the macro that specify a list of fields.